Reaction to the budget cap proposal

In my blog yesterday I posted some of the details of the 2010 regulations, focussing on the budget cap. Several teams have now had their say about the regulations. While many are in favour of the budget cap, seemingly all are against the two-tier system that it creates. The cap is voluntary, and those who agree to it will have greater technical freedom. This means two sets of rules, and is something that even the independant teams are opposed to.

The Williams team were one of the biggest supporters of a potential budget cap. They have been struggling to attract sponsorships and had made a loss over the previous couple of seasons. However, they were not keen on the two tier system used to introduce the budget cap. “Williams has supported the introduction of a budget cap since the idea was first put forward early in 2008,” said Frank Williams. “Since then FOTA has made tremendous steps forward on costs but the rationale for a budget cap has also grown even stronger.

“We would like to see all the teams operating to one set of regulations and under a budget cap in 2010 and that is the position we will be advocating within FOTA when we meet next week. We understand that this will represent a serious challenge for some of the teams but we expect that FOTA will work together to find a unified and constructive way to take the FIA’s initiative forward.”

This view was supported by McLaren chief MartinWhitmarsh. “As a member of FOTA, Vodafone McLaren Mercedes is of course supportive of FOTA’s recent efforts to reduce costs in Formula 1,” said Whitmarsh. “Equally, we recognise the excellent work done recently by the FIA in the area of cost-reduction. Having said all that, we understand that some teams’ operational budgets may still be unnecessarily high in the challenging global economic situation in which we now find ourselves.

“Nonetheless, we believe that the optimal solution – which may or may not include a budget cap, but which ideally would not encompass a two-tier regulatory framework – is most likely to be arrived at via measured negotiation between all parties”.

Sponsors are hard to come by in F1 at the moment

Force India owner Mijay Mallya was also guarded about the two-tier prospect. “In principle Force India welcomes all cost cutting initiatives and budget caps, but we must fully investigate and understand the implications of the current measures proposed by both the FIA and FOTA”

It is clear that the majority, if not all, of the teams are against the two tier system. There is also going to be a dead heat, as there are five independant teams who will want the budget cap and five manufacturers who will be less keen. A key issue is that some teams need the budget cap to remain operational – Williams are struggling for revenues at the moment as I said before, and Brawn GP have only got two sponsors (although with their current level of success itis unlikely to remain that way for long). Teams like that could go bust without a budget cap. It isn’t simply a convenience, it’s a necessity.

This decision by the FIA was always going to polarize opinion and create debate. I said yesterday that I believe all of the teams will sign up to the cap eventually. Ferrari have written to the FIA stating that they believe the contract they signed with the FIA has been broken by this legislation, and the FIA has swiftly rejected that notion. The next few months will be filled with such arguements about the budget cap introduction, but I think that the only logical outcome is for the manufacturers to sign up to the budget cap.

It is clear from the reactions that I’ve mentioned that the teams do not want two rulebooks. With five independant teams wanting to sign up, and three more set to join the series, they outnumber the manufacturers. Either the manufacturers will pull out, or they will sign up. Toyota and Renault are already considering their futures in F1 due to financial pressure, so a budget cap would appeal.

McLaren will probably go with the majority, as they sit halfway between constructor and independant (they are 40% owned by Mercedes, who’s parent company have just announced a $1b loss. Yes, one billion dollars). That leaves Ferrari and BMW. If BMW were to leave, I don’t think too many would mind, as they have only recently joined. Ferrari could prove the sticking point.

There will be many twists and turns still to come as this story unfolds. It would be nice if this blog could be about what happens on the race track a little more, but as usual the team bosses seem more focussed on scoring points away from the circuit.

FIA announce £40m budget cap for 2010

The FIA today announced that next season will introduce a voluntary budget cap for the teams, and as a result have effectively introduced a two-tier system for the first time in the championship’s history.

The proposal means that the teams who opt in to the budget cap will be limited to spending £40m, a fraction of many teams’ current budgets. However this does not include engines, driver salaries or marketing.

The teams that agree to the budget cap will gain more technical freedom, in order to allow them to compete with the teams spending more money. These include adjustable wings, unlimited engine revs and twice as much power from any KERS system they may be carrying.

Clearly what this means is that there are two sets of regulations, creating a two tier championship. However, I don’t think that will happen. I believe that all of the teams will in fact sign up to the budget cap, and here’s why.

There will most likely be 13 teams next season, with three new teams set to join the championship. This will mean eight independant teams, and five manufacturers (Ferrari, McLaren, Toyoto, Renault and BMW). The independants will all no doubt sign up. They are all self funded and so a budget cap, with performance benefits, will be of great appeal.

Then we come to the manufacturers. They will not be happy about the budget cap, and Ferrari and BMW have both been vocal in their disagreement. This comes as little surprise, as the sport has been dominated by the manufacturers for the last decade as a result of their wealth and as a result they have pushed up the costs for all of the other teams. They will not want to lose this advantage.

However – look at what the budget does not restrict; driver salaries, engines, marketing… add those onto the £40m and the drop from their current level of spending is not as great as it would first appear.

Secondly, are they willing to take the risk of being outperformed by teams operating on a fraction of their budget due to their more generous technical specifications?

Thirdly, and this is something that I have not seen mentioned on any other news site, is that the teams that are budget capped will be allowed get twice as much of a power boost from their KERS system. This, I believe, is crucial.

There has been a lot of debate about KERS this season, mainly regarding its effectiveness. It does provide a boost of 80bhp for 6.5 seconds every lap, but this needs to be weighed up against the fact it weighs 30kg, negatively affecting the cars balance. Cars without KERS can instead place ballast around the car, which improves the handling rather than having a battery located in one part. This means the benefits of running the KERS system is, overall, minimal.

The teams though have spent millions on developing these systems. That is why the FIA has done two things. Firstly, they have raised the mminimum weight of the cars, which means that the weight disadvantage of KERS is reduced. Secondly, the amount of power it produces is doubled, to 120bhp.

This means that the teams who have spent millions developing this technology will now be able to use it to gain a real performance advantage. But… they have to sign up to the budget cap. Suddenly it appears a lot more appealing to the manufacturers, don’t you think?

That is why I don’t think that there will be a two tier system next season. While the budget cap is voluntary, I think all of the teams will sign up to it. For the independant teams it’s a no brainer. For the manufacturers the benefits outweight the cons – their spending won’t be reduced by as much as it seems, they won’t be at a performance disadvantage, and they will be able to fully utilize the KERS systems that they have spent a fortune developing.

And let’s not forget that car manufacturers aren’t exactly on safe financial footings at the present time, and so the budget cap may help safeguard their F1 future and prevent them withdrawing from the sport like Honda did last year.

No doubt there will be a great deal of fighting over this cap, particularly from Ferrari and BMW, but I am convinced that they will sign up. 2010 could be a very interesting year for F1…

How Toyota blew their chance

In my last post I explained why Toyota could be set to win their first race. In this one, I’m going to explain why they didn’t.

I mentioned that if Timo Glock got ahead of his Toyota team mate Jarno Trulli the team would be in a great position. Glock did just that, making an excellent start and leading into the first corner. Trulli slotted into second place.

It was the ideal situation for Toyota, as Glock had less fuel than Trulli and was therefore able to use his weight advantage to pull out a gap to the rest. Trulli was also looking strong, with a small but comfortable margin over third placed Jenson Button’s Brawn GP car. Their main rival for the win, Red Bull’s Sebastian Vettel, was tied up behind Lewis Hamilton’s McLaren and losing time with every passing lap.

 

 

Glock leads Trulli during the opening lap

 

So far so good, but then it started to unravel for them. The two Toyotas were the lightest fueled of the four front runners, and were therefore the first to pit. The team made a crucial mistake though, as they put both of their drivers onto the harder of the two tyre compounds. The harder tires are a second a lap slower than the softer ones.

This meant in the extra few laps that Button had until his stop, the Toyotas’ lead that they had built up though the opening stint was obliterated. Button was able to lap two seconds a lap faster than either car, with the double hindrance of carrying more fuel and being on the wrong tires costing Toyota dear. By the time Button came out of the pitlane following his stop, he had leapfrogged both cars to lead the race. Vettel got up to third, also capatalizing on the pitstops to get past both Hamilton and Glock. Although Vettel was on the better tire, the advantage he had from them was nullified by being stuck behind Trulli on the harder tire. This allowed Button, also on the softer tire, to build up a comfortable margin.

The disadvantage that Trulli had would have been minimised if the stint was a short one. All of the drivers have to use both compounds at some point during the race, and so a short stint would have allowed him to finish the race on the stronger tire while both Button and Vettel struggled on the harder.

That wasn’t the case though. Toyota put Trulli on a long second stint, meaning that he lost a second a lap for around twenty laps. This allowed Button to build up a huge lead, and by the time the roles were reversed with fifteen laps to go the gap was just two big to catch up. To add insult to injury, Vettel moved into second place during the second round of pitstops, so now it was Trulli on soft tires being stuck behind Vettel on the harder ones.

That was how it finished, Button from Vettel and Trulli. Trulli got the fastest lap of the race, in addition to pole position the day before, showing that he genuinely had the fastest car of the weekend. The win was there for him on Sunday, but that bad tire choice for the second stint cost him dear. Afterwards, Toyota team president John Howett admitted as much.

“We should have gone with the soft tyre for the longer stint. We had the option to go three stop or two stop. On three we would have been stuck in traffic, so we decided to go for two,” said Howett.

“And we were worried that the soft tyre would probably not hold out with the heavier fuel load and the conditions. I think strategically it was wrong. We were slower on the harder tyre, and I think that is where we lost most of the advantage.”

Given the speed that Toyota showed this weekend then I’ve no doubt they will have another opportunity to gain their first F1 win. They just need to make sure they don’t compromise their own chances by making the wrong strategic call. I said in my previous post that Button or Vettel could spoil Toyota’s party but, in truth, they spoilt it all by themselves.

Here’s are a couple of interviews with Trulli and Glock after the race. Neither was able to hide their disappointment over the strategy choice;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8019503.stm

Why it could be a Trulli memorable day for Toyota

First of all, apologies for the pun.

Today could well be a historic day for Toyota. After yesterday’s qualifying session they lock out the front row of the grid, with Jarno Trulli on pole position and Timo Glock alongside him.

Toyota have looked good all season, with Trulli finishing third behind the Brawn GP cars in Australia, and Glock matching that result in Malaysia. They went missing in the rain in China, but today’s Bahrain Grand Prix is guaranteed to be dry which should play more to their strengths.

It’s also important to note that Toyota were the only one of the current top teams to have tested at this circuit during winter testing. They know every bump on this circuit and will have a huge amount of data accumilated. They will know exactly what to expect come race day.

A quick note about Trulli also – he outqualified team mate Glock despite carrying more fuel onboard, which is an impressive achievement. Perhaps Glock made a mistake on his lap, but none the less Trulli’s lap was excellent.

With today’s race, I think that Glock could well get the win today. He’s been largely written off elsewhere, with many believing the race is between Trulli and third-placed Sebastian Vettel, and Jenson Button could also come into play. But Glock is short fueled, and if he gets past Trulli early on he could build up a lead. Trulli is known for being a qualifying specialist, so pole position is no surprise, but his race pace is not as special. If Glock gets away quick, then Trulli could begin to hold up the rest of the field.

I believe that Toyota will pick up their first ever Formula 1 win today. Trulli will be the clear favourite, but don’t rule out Glock. The only question mark is whether or not Vettel or Button can put a spanner in the works.

Anyway, the formation lap is about to begin, so it’s time to enjoy the race – and possibly watch history in the making…

Oh, and here’s a video of Trulli’s excellent pole position lap from yesterday.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8018276.stm

Don’t blame Lewis for this mess

Suddenly the world of Formula 1 has turned on World Champion Lewis Hamilton. Five months ago he was on top of the world, having just become the youngest champion in the history of the sport. Yet today we was diqualified from the Australian Grand Prix for giving “seriously misleading” information to the stewards at an enquiry at the end of the race. In layman’s tems: he lied. As a result, Hamilton has come in for heavy criticim.

I’m not going to defend Lewis in terms of the lying aspect – he has admitted that he did and, credit to him, has had the guts to call a press conferece and explain the situation in front of the world’s media, alone. You can watch that press conference here.

Let’s quickly recap what happened towards the end of last weekend’s Australian Grand Prix. On lap 56 of 58, Sebastian Vettel and Robert Kubica collided, causing the safety car to be deployed. At the start of the lap, Jarno Trulli was in third position, and Hamilton in fourth. However, at the penultimate corner Trulli went off the track, and Hamilton passed him. Confusion ensued – overtaking under safety car conitions is aainst the regulations, but Trulli has left the circuit meaning that Hamilton was quite entitled to pass him. The incident had not been caught on camera, and so the McLaren team were unsure exactly what had happened, and so instructed Lewis to let Trulli back pass to ensure no penalty was given.

When the race finished, Trulli was third with Hamilton fourth. An investigation was called by the stewards to establish how and why Trulli had got past Hamilton. The enquiry saw Hamilton asked if he had been instructed to let Trulli back past – he said no. Trulli was given a 25 second penalty, dropping him to twelth, promoting Hamilton into third place. With Toyota being unable to appeal, it appeared to be case closed.

That was until more evidence surrounding the incident came to light. The first was an interview that Lewis conducted immediately after the race, and before the enquiry, in which he said that he did allow Trulli back past under instruction. Additionally, the radio transmissions between McLaren and Hamilton were analysed, which revealed that Lewis was clearly told to let Trulli pass him, and Lewis replying with “ok”.  This led to the FIA reopening the case, summoning the team to another investigation. This led to Trulli being reinstated in third place, and Hamilton disqualified from the race completely. Further sanctions could follow, with some news oulets suggesting that either Hamilton or the McLaren team as whole could be banned for any number of races.

This is where, I feel, it is important to add context to Hamilton’s actions. Yes, Hamilton lied, but that doesn’t necessarily make him a liar. One swallow does not make a summer, as the proverb says. He was caught between a rock and a hard place, and had little option. As soon as he got out of the car, he gave an interview in which he said he let Trulli past. Moments later, he is rushed off to a stewards enquiry (still in his overalls at this point) with team manager Dave Ryan. Just before walking into the meeting Ryan tells Hamilton to deny any radio contact.

Put yourself in Lewis’ shoes. You’ve just been told to lie, moments before walking into ameetnig. You don’t have ime to discuss the situation, and either you lie, or you go against the wishes of your employer (and in Lewis’ case, an employer that ha guided him throughout his career and rewards him handsomely financially). He had no choice but to go along with the instructions given to him.

It is important to note that Dave Ryan has now been suspended by McLaren, so it clear who they blame for the incident. Ok, it’s much easier to blame and suspend him than it is Hamilton, but he was thesenior member in the meetnig and he was the one who gave Hamilton the instructions with no time for discussion. Smoe have labelled Ryan as a scapegoat, an eay way out for McLaren to shift the blame from Lewis. How easy is it to sack somebody who has worked for the team for 35 years, and is a key part of their management structure? I can’t see how sacking him is an easy way out, it would not have been considered if he was not genuinely at fault. It would be a bizarre decision if they decided to sack a key member of their personel just to save face.

Th other thing is Lewis’ genuine and frank apology that he gave to the press. There was genuine regret, his voice cracking at several points, which showed how sorry his was for the situation. What hurts the most is that he knows he is not that sort of person, this was out of character – a one off that could seriously affect his reputation.

I just hope that this is not held aganist Lewis for too long. It was wrong, yes, but it was out of character and had little option but to go along with the instructions of his team. He has been diqualified from the Australian Grand Prix, and has been publicly shamed by the FIA. He has been punished enough already without further criticism of his actions. He has had the guts to stand up and admit to his mistakes and showed genuin remorse for his actions. I just hope that people realize was an honest and genuine guy Lewis is and don’t use this one mistake as leverage against him.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!